The Moonster Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 9 hours ago, BawWatchin said: It's a very stealthy way of inflicting harm on people. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 9 hours ago, BawWatchin said: What evidence would there be? It's a very stealthy way of inflicting harm on people. The whole point of it is that there is no possible way of proving it. So you can either believe this guy who has worked in positions that would make him privvy to such information, or you can dismiss it altogether because it can't be proven, which again, as I said, would be the whole point of using this method of attack. Quote Answer by Gary Larson, Medical Director at Procure Proton Therapy Center, PI for Proton Collab Grp-OKC, on Quora: WiFi operates in the 2 to 5 GHz range -- part of the microwave portion of the electromagnetic spectrum. This is in the same part of the spectrum where cell phones operate so I may refer to WiFi or cellphone electromagnetic radiation interchangeably. These are radio waves -- no different from those used to broadcast television programs, except that they are higher in frequency. They aren't nearly as high a frequency as visible light, and no one worries about getting cancer from visible light (ultraviolet light, on the other hand, causes skin cancer, but this is the minimum energy necessary to cause ionizations that can cause breaks in strands of DNA, which is the mechanism by which cancer cells can be created). There is no credible evidence that non-ionizing radiation has any adverse health effects at all. There is no radiobiologic mechanism that could explain such an association -- and absolutely no scientifically valid evidence that this has ever happened. I have treated patients with cancer for over thirty years as a board-certified radiation oncologist and I am familiar with every carcinogenic agent known to man. I'll tell you with absolute certainty that radio waves cannot harm you (unless perhaps you were in the path of a multi-megawatt microwave beam, in which case they might cook you. But as far as I know, there is no likelihood that this danger even exists). There has never been (and will never be) a randomized trial assessing the cause and effect relationship between radio frequency emissions and neoplastic disease. In order to have a randomized study, half of the randomly selected subjects would need to avoid cellphone use and that's not going to happen. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Moonster Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 I heard BawWatchin makes his own toothpaste because regular toothpastes contain fluoride which causes cavities and this is a very stealthy way of dental companies inflicting harm on people. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pocketman Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 3 hours ago, Gaz FFC said: I feel it's admitting you've gave up. Who chooses Saturday evening as their 1st choice? It's for adults with kids and guys who's wives won't let them out to the pub. the issue I can't fully understand is how a TV programme switches from BBC 2 to BBC 1 the ratings increase ie some/a number of "viewers" will never stray to BBC 2...... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BawWatchin Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 (edited) 22 minutes ago, welshbairn said: Yes, I know all about the official "as far as I know" line. You know why? Because studies are never actually done to test the risks of these waves. It is assumed that they are in no way dangerous. It isn't proven that they're not dangerous however. You have to ask yourself though, if these waves aren't dangerous, then why have governments been building weapons that use the exact same type of waves for the better part of 6 decades? Edited October 3, 2018 by BawWatchin 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsimButtHitsASix Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 Got a point there BawWatch. They've been making atom bombs for years now. You know what else is made out of atoms? Cigarettes. You know what gives you cancer? Mutations in cells. You know who has cancer? People. What are people made out of? Atoms. You know where you also find atoms? In cells. Do you know where you get cells? Prison. You know what they use as a form of currency in prison? Cigarettes. Coincidence? I think not. 15 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Archer (Raconteur) Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 6 minutes ago, AsimButtHitsASix said: Got a point there BawWatch. They've been making atom bombs for years now. You know what else is made out of atoms? Cigarettes. You know what gives you cancer? Mutations in cells. You know who has cancer? People. What are people made out of? Atoms. You know where you also find atoms? In cells. Do you know where you get cells? Prison. You know what they use as a form of currency in prison? Cigarettes. Coincidence? I think not. ^^^^^ 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trackdaybob Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 14 hours ago, Sergeant Wilson said: Is that the motto of all aircraft engineers? Maybe it should be 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 29 minutes ago, BawWatchin said: Yes, I know all about the official "as far as I know" line. You know why? Because studies are never actually done to test the risks of these waves. It is assumed that they are in no way dangerous. It isn't proven that they're not dangerous however. You have to ask yourself though, if these waves aren't dangerous, then why have governments been building weapons that use the exact same type of waves for the better part of 6 decades? Wifi operates at 2-20 watts, 6 on average. The US area denial microwave weapon operates at 2 megawatts plus. It's like comparing a smoke alarm to Hiroshima. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miguel Sanchez Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 I feel as if BawWatchin has posted about some patently ludicrous conspiracy theory before. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Moonster Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 1 hour ago, BawWatchin said: Yes, I know all about the official "as far as I know" line. You know why? Because studies are never actually done to test the risks of these waves. It is assumed that they are in no way dangerous. It isn't proven that they're not dangerous however. You have to ask yourself though, if these waves aren't dangerous, then why have governments been building weapons that use the exact same type of waves for the better part of 6 decades? You have to ask yourself though, if these waves are dangerous why do you continue to use the internet? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.A.F.C Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 He uses cat 5 and dial up. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The OP Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 5 hours ago, Miguel Sanchez said: I feel as if BawWatchin has posted about some patently ludicrous conspiracy theory before. He had some philosophical thoughts along the line of you should never trust anything scientists (or experts in general say) because scientists have sometimes been wrong and it is all a matter of perception so anyone could be right in any event. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JTS98 Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 6 hours ago, welshbairn said: Wifi operates at 2-20 watts, 6 on average. The US area denial microwave weapon operates at 2 megawatts plus. It's like comparing a smoke alarm to Hiroshima. Wait, you're saying my smoke alarm is like Hiroshima? Shiiiiiiiiiiiit!!!!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerberus Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 11 hours ago, Zen Archer said: ^^^^^ If he can hold his hand like that for a while, he will be popular with the ladies. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shandon Par Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 13 hours ago, Cerberus said: If he can hold his hand like that for a while, he will be popular with the ladies. Dusty or Ted? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SweeperDee Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 I quite like Craig Levein. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairnardo Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 I quite like Craig Levein. I think that is becoming more and more popular the more he ragdolls Brendan about purely for the craic. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerberus Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 Liz Hurley has decent body but her face is a let down.Another Jackie Stallone.6/10 -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairnardo Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 21 minutes ago, Cerberus said: Liz Hurley has decent body but her face is a let down. Another Jackie Stallone. 6/10 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.